3 ms·
I can't really see the problem here. The employee made a bet. Sure, he used information not commonly available, but he didn't do it on his own site. And it was
by phillc73 11y ago
I can't really see the problem here. The employee made a bet. Sure, he used information not commonly available, but he didn't do it on his own site. And it was still a bet, not something that was guaranteed to win.
If I was employed by a horse racing trainer, and I happened to know certain information about the preparation of a particular horse, which the public hadn't factored into the available odds, and I placed a bet on that horse to win, there's nothing illegal in that (not in the UK at least). I'm in a position to act on uncommon knowledge, but I've still placed a bet and there's no guarantee the horse will win. It happens all the time.
- catshirt 11y agoI hope someone with more authority can chime in- but to continue with your analogy- stocks too are no "sure fire" bet, are yet subject to insider trading regulations. so it would seem the certainty of return is irrelevant.
- wodenokoto 11y agoWith stocks you can know, before the market, that a company is filing bankruptcy, or that they missed their quarterly target. I don't see how you can know that a player will hit a home run, before everybody else.
- rlpb 11y agoI have no idea about the legality, but the implications of this might be bad enough for the betting industry that they could ban this themselves. Otherwise the general public might be less likely to want to bet because they know that the insiders will get a disproportionate amount of the winnings, effectively lessening their odds.
- _xzu 11y agoDoes someone really think that insider information is not widely used in betting? Every bettor I know, professional or casual, tries to get as much insider tips as possible. Difference is that usually pros have better connections and statistics.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y agoThere's no guarantee with insider trading either. It's still illegal.
- joosters 11y agoHorse racing (and other sports) insider information is an odd edge case in betting. You can't get rid of it, since the owner/trainer will always know more than the public. So it is grudgingly accepted. Using it as justification for other, preventable insider-information abuse is plain wrong. The fact that it is a bet, and might not always pay out, is irrelevant. If you keep using insider information, on average you will profit from it.